Ask A Graduate Recruiter Anything!

[JD94]

Hi @Jessica Booker

Apologies if you've answered something similar before!

For a set of application questions which don't have a word count, is there a soft 'cap' on what the team/person reading the questions would expect? On a question which wants me to 'outline' my interests, positions of responsibility and achievements, I'm struggling with how much to include. I don't know whether to go for 1 of each and expand heavily, or 2 of each etc.

I was thinking to go for 300 words as my own cap and speak about what I hold dearest as not to come across as too formulaic with the approach but to avoid rambling.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi @Jessica Booker

Apologies if you've answered something similar before!

For a set of application questions which don't have a word count, is there a soft 'cap' on what the team/person reading the questions would expect? On a question which wants me to 'outline' my interests, positions of responsibility and achievements, I'm struggling with how much to include. I don't know whether to go for 1 of each and expand heavily, or 2 of each etc.

I was thinking to go for 300 words as my own cap and speak about what I hold dearest as not to come across as too formulaic with the approach but to avoid rambling.

Thanks in advance!

If there is no word count, I would include whatever is relevant. For one person that might be 1 point each, for the next it might be 5 points each. There is no set formula here, otherwise they would give you a more structured form to complete.

If you have a lot to include, think about the following:

• What supersedes what? If you captained your school netball team, but then went on to captain your university netball team, the latter supersedes the former. Even then, you could combine them though.
• What are you proud of? If there is something you are particularly proud of but it seems less "impressive" don't be afraid to include it - if it was an achievement for you, you should mention it (and don't get caught up that it might not be an achievement to the next person)
• What or where did you achieve the most? No one will give a damn if you are a member of the law society at university (*yawn*) but that charity fundraising you did when you were 16/17 that completely threw you out of your comfort zone will be more of interest. Don't just assume the "tick-box" extra-curriculars are what the recruiter wants to hear about especially if it is at the expense of you including other activity
• What is unique about the information you will put in this section over other people? What is going to make you stand out from the crowd of other answers? Again, that will be more interesting to your reader
• Don't tell me the self-explanatory - I know what a debater/mooter does, I know what a captain does, I know what a Treasurer does, I know how people fundraise, I know what a mentor does. So don't bother telling me the "process" if it is self-explanatory. What I don't know is your personal impact - what you personally achieved/what wouldn't have happened if you weren't involved.

 

[Jessica Booker]

I have been trying to work out how to post this for a few days.

1. Stop trying to find the generic "perfect mould" of an answer. There isn't one - there is only a "perfect mould" of you and your individual/unique experiences. What that looks like for one person will be different to the next person. Yes, that will also mean that your "mould" is likely to be similar to some other candidates, but not every candidate. By trying to get to the generic "perfect mould" answer, you wear down your unique edges that make you stand out. This makes you blend into the mass of application forms that have also tried to fit the "perfect mould". You want to catch people's eye - you definitely don't want to blend into the masses of applications.
2. A job of a lawyer is not to present every bit of information to their client. They analyse what is important to the client, think about what the client wants to hear, what the client needs to hear and focuses on the most relevant/important information related to those points. This is the approach you have to take as an applicant. No firm wants your life story, they just want to hear what is relevant to them. This is why you can't necessarily rely on copying information from one application to another - what is relevant to one firm will be different to the next firm. Yes, there will be a lot of cross over, and probably a lot of similarities from time to time. But just like a lawyer needs to give tailored advice to their clients (no matter how similar they might seem), you need to provide a tailored application to the firm.

 

[Jaysen]

I have been trying to work out how to post this for a few days.

1. Stop trying to find the generic "perfect mould" of an answer. There isn't one - there is only a "perfect mould" of you and your individual/unique experiences. What that looks like for one person will be different to the next person. Yes, that will also mean that your "mould" is likely to be similar to some other candidates, but not every candidate. By trying to get to the generic "perfect mould" answer, you wear down your unique edges that make you stand out. This makes you blend into the mass of application forms that have also tried to fit the "perfect mould". You want to catch people's eye - you definitely don't want to blend into the masses of applications.
2. A job of a lawyer is not to present every bit of information to their client. They analyse what is important to the client, think about what the client wants to hear, what the client needs to hear and focuses on the most relevant/important information related to those points. This is the approach you have to take as an applicant. No firm wants your life story, they just want to hear what is relevant to them. This is why you can't necessarily rely on copying information from one application to another - what is relevant to one firm will be different to the next firm. Yes, there will be a lot of cross over, and probably a lot of similarities from time to time. But just like a lawyer needs to give tailored advice to their clients (no matter how similar they might seem), you need to provide a tailored application to the firm.

This is such good advice!

 

[Camilla]

Hey

This has probably been asked before so apologies in advance, but I am questioning a deadline on an online test.

"Please complete this assessment as soon as possible; the deadline is 12th November 2019. Please note if you cannot complete the test by this date, unfortunately we will not be able to progress with your application."

Is this inclusive of the 12th? I assume so but want to double check. I had planned to take the test today but I would rather do it in the morning now.

Thanks

 

[Helena]

I'm fairly sure that means the deadline is the end of the day on the 12th.

 

[Camilla]

I'm fairly sure that means the deadline is the end of the day on the 12th.

I thought as much but I just have a creeping sense of doubt. Not sure whether to just take the test now just in case.

 

[S30]

I thought as much but I just have a creeping sense of doubt. Not sure whether to just take the test now just in case.

I agree with Helena, it looks like the deadline is 23:59pm on 12th November. Good luck!

 

[Camilla]

I agree with Helena, it looks like the deadline is 23:59pm on 12th November. Good luck!

Thank you Sairah and Helena!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hey

This has probably been asked before so apologies in advance, but I am questioning a deadline on an online test.

"Please complete this assessment as soon as possible; the deadline is 12th November 2019. Please note if you cannot complete the test by this date, unfortunately we will not be able to progress with your application."

Is this inclusive of the 12th? I assume so but want to double check. I had planned to take the test today but I would rather do it in the morning now.

Thanks

Yes, definitely inclusive of the 12th (otherwise the deadline would be the 11th).

 

[Plum]

Hi Jessica,

In the final part of my application, there is a 'Your Documents' section which says: 'You can use this section to upload any documents that you feel are relevant to your application (e.g. references, transcripts, etc.). Please note this is not mandatory.'

My transcripts aren't the most accessible - it would take a few days to get them, and I'd like to submit early. Do you think they prefer that you do upload them even if they're not mandatory? I assume we'd have to bring them anyway at some point but perhaps graduate recruitment have a preference? Just don't want to do anything that might be detrimental to my application.

Thanks!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi Jessica,

In the final part of my application, there is a 'Your Documents' section which says: 'You can use this section to upload any documents that you feel are relevant to your application (e.g. references, transcripts, etc.). Please note this is not mandatory.'

My transcripts aren't the most accessible - it would take a few days to get them, and I'd like to submit early. Do you think they prefer that you do upload them even if they're not mandatory? I assume we'd have to bring them anyway at some point but perhaps graduate recruitment have a preference? Just don't want to do anything that might be detrimental to my application.

Thanks!

Depends on the nature of the reference. If you have mitigating circumstances and the documents verify them, I’d wait.

If they are just transcripts or references from other people commenting on how good a person/candidate you are, I wouldn’t worry about it.

As it states, this is not a mandatory section, so it’s not going to be detrimental to your application if you dont

 

[Plum]

Thanks so much!

 

[Sergiulix]

Hi Jessica,

I was part of a vacation scheme at a firm I won’t currently name in London the past summer. The firm had their selection process organised in a way that the pre-VS interview was only an HR interview, with the assessment centre being scattered through the VS, with test on the Thurs and Fri of the first week, and the Tues and Wed of the second week. People that stood out in the VS as well as in the AC tests would get the final interview, which would be schedule after the VS ended. On Tues of the second week, one of the students tells the rest of us that she had already been booked for an interview on Thurs/Fri of that week (at that time still having 2 tests to complete). She told us that she told grad recruitment that she would not return for another interview later as her flights had already been booked.


Because I am not UK-based, I thought that I should also ask grad recruitment on whether they can tell me, not necessarily whether I obtained the interview, but whether the final interviews would be done the week after the VS so that I could extend my flight or whether I should return potentially at a later date. When I confronted them about the fact that one of us was already given an interview, the recruiter sort of said nothing and told me she would get back to me.

In the final days of the VS, while the student was doing her interviews, the recruitment team kept telling all of us that they would return to us only after checking all of the tests.

To conclude, I was not invited for a final interview and the student ended up obtaining the TC (she turned it down afterwards). While grad recruitment might have argued that they would have only considered the final interview if the tests were passed, I still believe that it offered the student an unfair advantage that would give her more opportunities to succeed.

My question basically is whether I should have said something to the solicitors there (I managed to develop a good relationship with a partner that was involved in recruitment) or whether it is just a fact that recruitment can bend rules sometimes.

Thank you!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi Jessica,

I was part of a vacation scheme at a firm I won’t currently name in London the past summer. The firm had their selection process organised in a way that the pre-VS interview was only an HR interview, with the assessment centre being scattered through the VS, with test on the Thurs and Fri of the first week, and the Tues and Wed of the second week. People that stood out in the VS as well as in the AC tests would get the final interview, which would be schedule after the VS ended. On Tues of the second week, one of the students tells the rest of us that she had already been booked for an interview on Thurs/Fri of that week (at that time still having 2 tests to complete). She told us that she told grad recruitment that she would not return for another interview later as her flights had already been booked.


Because I am not UK-based, I thought that I should also ask grad recruitment on whether they can tell me, not necessarily whether I obtained the interview, but whether the final interviews would be done the week after the VS so that I could extend my flight or whether I should return potentially at a later date. When I confronted them about the fact that one of us was already given an interview, the recruiter sort of said nothing and told me she would get back to me.

In the final days of the VS, while the student was doing her interviews, the recruitment team kept telling all of us that they would return to us only after checking all of the tests.

To conclude, I was not invited for a final interview and the student ended up obtaining the TC (she turned it down afterwards). While grad recruitment might have argued that they would have only considered the final interview if the tests were passed, I still believe that it offered the student an unfair advantage that would give her more opportunities to succeed.

My question basically is whether I should have said something to the solicitors there (I managed to develop a good relationship with a partner that was involved in recruitment) or whether it is just a fact that recruitment can bend rules sometimes.

Thank you!

There is nothing you should have/could have said to lawyers/partners at the firm.

They aren't "rules" - they are processes, and they often have to be bent to accommodate individual's people requirements. In this instance, the matter was bent so they could assess the person. If they didn't bend the process, they wouldn't have been able to assess this individual at all.

The only other outcome was they would have skipped the final process for this individual, and that would have been far more unfair than letting them complete the assessment.

 

[Sergiulix]

There is nothing you should have/could have said to lawyers/partners at the firm.

They aren't "rules" - they are processes, and they often have to be bent to accommodate individual's people requirements. In this instance, the matter was bent so they could assess the person. If they didn't bend the process, they wouldn't have been able to assess this individual at all.

The only other outcome was they would have skipped the final process for this individual, and that would have been far more unfair than letting them complete the assessment.

I understand your perspective and do agree that rules have to be bent to accommodate people’s needs. Maybe I did not fully make myself clear: I also told grad recruitment that I have a flight booked for the Saturday after the vac scheme (as the student actually did as well). I told them this at about the same time she did in our first week there. Thus, to me it seems that there were some rules that were bent in one scenario while not in another. There were other people in my position that would have had to return. Thus, my only logical conclusion is that these people had already made preferences before the tests were completed.

I am not sure even why I am posting this, since it’s a done deal and, given my interpretation of their behaviour, I would not have wanted to work for them anyways. But I do hope that you see my point now.

 

[Jessica Booker]

I understand your perspective and do agree that rules have to be bent to accommodate people’s needs. Maybe I did not fully make myself clear: I also told grad recruitment that I have a flight booked for the Saturday after the vac scheme (as the student actually did as well). I told them this at about the same time she did in our first week there. Thus, to me it seems that there were some rules that were bent in one scenario while not in another. There were other people in my position that would have had to return. Thus, my only logical conclusion is that these people had already made preferences before the tests were completed.

I am not sure even why I am posting this, since it’s a done deal and, given my interpretation of their behaviour, I would not have wanted to work for them anyways. But I do hope that you see my point now.

It might have been that they already knew that previous assessments hadn't been passed and that influenced the decision not to invite those people. I get that maybe it would have been better to tell you and other candidates that, but ultimately that tends to impact people's focus while they are working. There can also be a tendency for it to impact the group of interns' mentality too.

To be honest, this is the worst part of the job (managing people's expectations) - its really tricky and always requires doing what you think is best overall for the firm, rather than the candidates. HR might not have made this decision, it could have quiet easily been a partner who pushed for the other candidate to be interviewed earlier, and then HR are left to pick up the pieces.

 

[Sergiulix]

It might have been that they already knew that previous assessments hadn't been passed and that influenced the decision not to invite those people. I get that maybe it would have been better to tell you and other candidates that, but ultimately that tends to impact people's focus while they are working. There can also be a tendency for it to impact the group of interns' mentality too.

That could be the case. Thank you for explaining the grad recruitment’s perspective of this. I bet it’s tough to deal with the different demands of the job. I guess what myself and other people on the scheme disliked was the lack of communication regarding the decision. It seemed to us that HR can’t really say ‘we will start looking at the AC results after the scheme’ on the friday of us leaving while at the same time being fully aware that you have just interviewed a candidate without at least giving the image of bad faith. But yeah, I cannot be sure that it wasn’t something else that influenced the decision.

 

[Jessica Booker]

That could be the case. Thank you for explaining the grad recruitment’s perspective of this. I bet it’s tough to deal with the different demands of the job. I guess what myself and other people on the scheme disliked was the lack of communication regarding the decision. It seemed to us that HR can’t really say ‘we will start looking at the AC results after the scheme’ on the friday of us leaving while at the same time being fully aware that you have just interviewed a candidate without at least giving the image of bad faith. But yeah, I cannot be sure that it wasn’t something else that influenced the decision.

They could have not looked at any post final assessment decisions until after the scheme. It sounds like they just assessed someone ahead of the scheme ending. That doesn’t mean they made any decisions at that time.

The two decisions (who to assess and then who to offer) can be very separate processes.

But agree that this is by no means ideal and awkward. I don’t think there was any “bad faith” to it though

 

[R203]

Hi Jessica!

Would it be okay for me to, in cover letters, explain what got me into wanting to pursue a legal career, and thereafter, a commercial legal career? In like a gradual process rather than a sudden interest for commercial law?

Thank you so much!!